Siman - Shabbos Daf 52

• The leash of a parah adumah

Rav holds that an excessive restraint is considered a burden and is therefore prohibited for an animal to be restrained with it on Shabbos due to the prohibition of hotzaah. This was challenged from a Baraisa that stated that if the owner of a parah adumah tied a leash to it, the parah adumah is still valid. A leash is considered an excessive restraint for a parah adumah, and if an excessive restraint is considered a burden, then it should disqualify the parah adumah which is not permitted to carry burdens.

Three Amoraim defended Rav, explaining that in this case the extra restraint was necessary, and therefore it was not considered excessive to be classified as a burden:

• Abaye said the Baraisa was referring to a cow that was being transported to a different city and therefore it required extra restraint so that it would not turn back.

• Rava explained that since a parah adumah is so rare and priceless, it needs to be guarded with extra care.

• Ravina said that the Baraisa was referring to a rebellious cow which required extra restraint.

• Animal collar becoming tamei

The Mishnah stated that one may sprinkle the ash-water of the parah adumah upon a collar of an animal, or immerse the collar in a mikveh even while it on the animal’s neck. This seems to contradict a Mishnah in Keilim that states that a ring of an animal is not capable of becoming tamei.

• Rebbe Yitzchak answered that the collar was initially noi adam (a person’s adornment) which then was transferred to become noi beheimah, (an animal adornment). Rashi explains that the ring became tamei while it was still a person’s adornment.

• Rav Yosef explained that since a person pulls an animal with the collar, it is classified as a human utensil, not an animal utensil.

• How a vessel stops being mekabel tumah

A Mishnah from Keilim was brought that taught that all keilim utensils become susceptible to contract tumah through machshava (thought), if the craftsman decides he will use it without adding more to it, but they do not lose their capacity to contract tumah unless there was a shinui maaseh (a physical change).

Rebbe Yehuda taught in a Baraisa that when the Tanna of the Mishnah said it loses its capacity to contract tumah through a maaseh (action), he was only referring to a maaseh that brought about a destructive physical change.